Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Servicing Stop Limited Registered Office Address: 57 London Rd, Enfield, Middlesex, England, EN2 6DU Company Type: Private Limited Company Company Status: Active Company Number: 06558606 Directors: Oliver Joseph Richmond Appointed 8th April 2008, Toby Robert Richmond Appointed 8th September 2009 Companies House Link: SERVICING STOP LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK SERVICING STOP LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual...   Endole Link: Servicing Stop Limited - Company Profile - Endole SUITE.ENDOLE.CO.UK Servicing Stop Limited is an active company located in Enfield, Greater London. View Servicing Stop Limited profile, shareholders, contacts...  
    • Hi I assume the Loft Conversion with the eaves and crawl space was there when you initially purchased the property. Even in done after purchasing the property and the correct permissions were in place i.e. Local Authority, Land Registry, Freeholder which is Southern Land which would be required as a Leasehold property. The difficulty is if the Loft Conversion was there when you purchased the property and there is no evidence in your documents of the eaves and crawl space due to where the Red Lines stop in the plans or even after purchase it was added this is the reason you are having issues with selling due to those missing Red Lines in the Plans and any other Buyers competent Solicitor would flag this up. I can understand the reasons the Buyer wishes a Deed of Variation probably there Solicitor requesting this to ensure those missing red lines are covered before the Sale as they Flagged this as an issue as Red Lines missing on Plans and want buyer protected. As for the £8000 costs Together and cohort Southern Land are trying to charge have you thought of contacting a few Property Solicitors yourself to get a few quotes. (only mention this because when I research this possible costs can range from £500 - £2000 depending on the Deed of Variation work required and nothing to stop you doing this then approaching Together and cohorts with it) Also ask Together/Southern Land for a breakdown of the £8000 costs for the Deed of Variation. Yup do send both Together and Southern Land a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that data in whether it be emails, written, recorded calls etc. They then have 30 Calendar Days to respond and that time limit only starts once they acknowledge receipt of your SAR Request. When you purchased the property some 17yrs ago are the Solicitors that you went through at that time still operating? (I know probably a silly question but if they are nothing to stop you contacting them and asking them about this especially if the Loft Conversion was in place when you purchased the property) Another link that will be useful to you as Leasehold is The Leasehold Advisory Service: Home - The Leasehold Advisory Service WWW.LEASE-ADVICE.ORG Government funded, independent advice for residential leaseholders and park home residents  
    • Why struggling parents aren't choosing cheaper brands when it comes to infant formula milk.View the full article
    • Musk's profane attack on advertisers baffled experts - without adverts, how would X survive?View the full article
    • The amount has spiralled to an all-time high, according to exclusive research for us by Gretel.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.


      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
    • Post in Some advice on buying a used car
    • People are still buying used cars unseen, paying by cash or by bank transfer, relying on brand-new MOT's by the dealer's favourite MOT station….
      It always leads to tears!
      used car.mp4


    • Pizza delivery insurance.mp4




      Parcel delivery insurance 1.mp4
        • Haha
      • 2 replies

Welcome Finance Agreement

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3537 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then


Please click the "Report " link


at the bottom of one of the posts.


If you want to post a new story then


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts


Have recently been looking at my secured loan agreement with Welcome which is nearly two years old.

The loan amount was for £5000 over 48 months and this is on my loan agreement,

and under 'ther financial information' is an acceptance fee of £235

and a broker fee of £250 along with the 'interest charge' of £3098.41.

My query is, and why I would like some assistance,

why have my 'fees' had interest applied to them for the 48 months,

why is the 'total amount of credit' on my agreement different to that of my 'opening statement' which states £5485.

I can see that the fees have been added to the amount of credit but my agreement clearly states £5000.

On my 'statement of price' it also clearly states amount of credit as £5000

but when everything is broken down to arrive at my monthly payment of £178.82

the 'acceptance and broker fee' have an amount allocated to them,

so for instance,

the acceptance fee of £235 is actually costing £367.68 over the 48 months at a monthly payment of £7.66.

Any help/advice would be appreciated.


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 254
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

5000 @ 178.82 @ 48 months = 33.9% apr


5485 @ 178.82 @ 48 months = 26.8% apr


If you can proove that 'total amount of credit' was in fact £5485' then you will have a potential claim for unenforceability due to the total amount of credit is wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites



Here is my statement clearly showing that the opening balance was £5485 and not £5000 and with yet another APR. If I'm to put the account into 'dispute', what is the legal basis for this...apart from the obvious?

Link to post
Share on other sites



Here is my statement clearly showing that the opening balance was £5485 and not £5000 and with yet another APR. If I'm to put the account into 'dispute', what is the legal basis for this...apart from the obvious?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a read through this, correct data/enter dates where applicable.


Dear Sir/Madam


I am writing to you with regard to the above account. I have come across what I believe and can prove to be a breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 hence rendering the above account unenforceable.


I have discovered from your companies paperwork that whilst my agreement shows an acceptance fee of £235 that is calculated into the overall loan total your company has failed to disclose on this document that the £235 has had an interest rate applied. This contravenes s.61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and has been proved in court through Wilson V First County Trust. In addition, you have clearly stated to me that the “total amount of credit” provided was in fact £5485. I did not sign and Consumer Credit Agreement with a total amount of credit of £5485. I also believe that £5485 @ 178.82 @ 48 months = 26.8% apr, and not 33.9% as per the agreement.


I would also say that I feel your company has deliberately mislead their representations as the acceptance fee is clearly shown as a separate figure on the credit agreement I will be referring this matter to the Financial Services Authority as I deem this to be a direct attempt to mislead the customer.


Therefore as this account is now unenforceable I will be cancelling my future direct debits to your company with immediate effect and request a refund of all payments made to your company before this date.


Furthermore, despite sending you a formal Subject Access Request on the XXXXX, I still have not have received the necessary documents.


I would like to remind you that the 40 days for supplying information after our Subject Access Request ends on the XXXXXX.


In addition, if you fail to meet your obligation under the act a report will be sent to the information commissioner and you will face investigation.


Furthermore, I am sure you are now aware due to the sheer amount of these letters you receive plus the massive media attention, that every time you receive one of these letters it will be followed up by a request for a full refund of any disproportionate penalty charges and associated charges, this will give you 14 days to do so before court action. Please note if I have to take court action to reclaim these charges then I will do so. Therefore, to save yourselves some time and money, if you could just refund all these charges dating back six years immediately you will not incur the court fees or your solicitors fees and the 8% interest I am entitled to claim.


As this account is now in dispute you may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment. You may not add further interest or charges to the above account nor are you to pass this account to a third party.

Lastly you may not register any information in respect of this account with a credit reference agency nor are you allowed to issue a default with regards to this account.


If my request is not complied with within 14 days I will have no further option to file this matter in the courts.


I also draw to your attention the recent Office Of Fair Trading (OFT). “Lenders must not mislead borrowers that their debts are enforceable, when in fact they are not, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) says.”


Yours Faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks emanevs, shall I also include the 'broker fee' of £285 when quoting the figures?

  • So to clarify, my signed agreement is for £5000.
  • My initial statement shows the amount of credit given to be £5485.
  • The interest applied to the account refers to the £5485.
  • My 'statement of price' shows a repayment figure which includes the 'broker/acceptance' fees (including interest) but based on a loan of £5000

Is their mistake as really as straightforward as that and can I get the money back? There is the other issue of it being a secured loan with a charge on my house, how will this be affected. I have read on other threads that the charge would be removed if the loan is unenforcable, is this correct?


Do I send the dispute to the Nottingham H/O?

Do I need to quote anything else?

How are they likely to respond?


Thanks for the letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andys123, that was me. I have had the charge removed because the agreement was not properly executed. If the agreement is not properly executed then the security instrument is not properly executed either and has to be returned immediately Read sec 105 and 106 which clearly states this. They tried to hold onto the security but my legal argument won the day. It works, but I would only say with regard to ours that WF agreed non execution (after some pressure), you will need to convince them that this is the situation in your case. It obviously is but I guess until they agree you probably will not move forward easily on this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...